Test: Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S – Stor skärm, litet pris (Sammanfattning)
Testgrupp
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
80.7 % v7 (old) | 05/2020 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S SD 720G, Adreno 618 | 209 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.67" | 2400x1080 | |
76.6 % v7 (old) | 05/2020 | Motorola Moto G8 SD 665, Adreno 610 | 188 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.40" | 1560x720 | |
81.3 % v7 (old) | 04/2020 | Huawei P40 Lite Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6 | 183 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.40" | 2310x1080 | |
75.5 % v7 (old) | 12/2019 | Gigaset GS290 Helio P23 MT6763V, Mali-G71 MP2 | 190 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.30" | 2340x1080 | |
80.7 % v7 (old) | 10/2019 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4 | 200 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.53" | 2340x1080 |
Topp 10...
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara allround/multimediadatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara speldatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara budget/kontorsdatorer
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara kontors/premiumdatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara arbetsstationer
» Topp 10: De bästa små/kompakta bärbara datorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa ultrabooks
» Topp 10: Bästa hybriddatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa surfplattorna
» Topp 10: Marknadens bästa smartphones
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Huawei P40 Lite | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Gigaset GS290 | |
Motorola Moto G8 | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Huawei P40 Lite | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Gigaset GS290 | |
Motorola Moto G8 |
|
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 94 %
Mitt på batteriet: 622 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1111:1 (Svärta: 0.56 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.98 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 4.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
114.9% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
Gamma: 2.206
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S IPS, 2400x1080, 6.7" | Motorola Moto G8 IPS, 1560x720, 6.4" | Huawei P40 Lite IPS, 2310x1080, 6.4" | Gigaset GS290 IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3" | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro IPS, 2340x1080, 6.5" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 15% | 0% | 11% | -1% | |
Brightness middle | 622 | 504 -19% | 478 -23% | 465 -25% | 669 8% |
Brightness | 612 | 452 -26% | 448 -27% | 460 -25% | 630 3% |
Brightness Distribution | 94 | 83 -12% | 87 -7% | 88 -6% | 87 -7% |
Black Level * | 0.56 | 0.28 50% | 0.49 12% | 0.2 64% | 0.42 25% |
Contrast | 1111 | 1800 62% | 976 -12% | 2325 109% | 1593 43% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.98 | 3.84 4% | 3 25% | 5.3 -33% | 4.8 -21% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 7.33 | 6.1 17% | 5.6 24% | 7.3 -0% | 9 -23% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.5 | 2.7 40% | 4.1 9% | 4.2 7% | 6.2 -38% |
Gamma | 2.206 100% | 2.235 98% | 2.26 97% | 2.09 105% | 2.24 98% |
CCT | 7361 88% | 7125 91% | 7282 89% | 6558 99% | 7846 83% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 114.9 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM not detected | |||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 9 ms rise | |
↘ 15 ms fall | ||
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 50 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 21 ms rise | |
↘ 23 ms fall | ||
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 71 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). |
Geekbench 4.4 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Motorola Moto G8 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G () | |
Average of class Smartphone (844 - 9574, n=82, last 2 years) | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Motorola Moto G8 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G () | |
Average of class Smartphone (2630 - 30323, n=82, last 2 years) | |
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Average of class Smartphone (5192 - 18534, n=58, last 2 years) |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Motorola Moto G8 | |
Huawei P40 Lite | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (9027 - 13821, n=7) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Motorola Moto G8 | |
Huawei P40 Lite | |
Gigaset GS290 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (7673 - 10181, n=7) |
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Motorola Moto G8 | |
Huawei P40 Lite | |
Gigaset GS290 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (253274 - 288306, n=5) |
Basemark GPU 1.1 | |
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro |
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G () | |
Average of class Smartphone (2523 - 10071, n=6, last 2 years) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years) | |
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (37.8 - 54.4, n=4) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Motorola Moto G8 (Chrome 81) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (59.7 - 94.7, n=5) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Motorola Moto G8 (Chrome 81) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=146, last 2 years) | |
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chome 81) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (26.8 - 45.2, n=4) | |
Motorola Moto G8 (Chome 81) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (53 - 78, n=5) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Motorola Moto G8 (Chrome 81) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (11846 - 17734, n=5) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Motorola Moto G8 (Chrome 81) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Motorola Moto G8 (Chrome 81) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (2532 - 3577, n=5) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | Motorola Moto G8 | Huawei P40 Lite | Gigaset GS290 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro | Average 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -17% | 28% | -26% | 10% | -5% | 271% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 496.6 | 301 -39% | 913 84% | 274.2 -45% | 535 8% | 530 ? 7% | 1839 ? 270% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 214.8 | 239 11% | 181.7 -15% | 196.8 -8% | 193.5 -10% | 212 ? -1% | 1425 ? 563% |
Random Read 4KB | 137 | 57.3 -58% | 157.3 15% | 54.7 -60% | 156.2 14% | 130.6 ? -5% | 277 ? 102% |
Random Write 4KB | 123.6 | 128.1 4% | 175.4 42% | 19.77 -84% | 180.4 46% | 101.2 ? -18% | 309 ? 150% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 74.5 ? | 68.7 ? -8% | 82.6 ? 11% | 81.1 ? 9% | 71.6 ? -4% | 68.3 ? -8% | |
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 54.9 ? | 48.7 ? -11% | 70.6 ? 29% | 73.9 ? 35% | 57.3 ? 4% | 53.2 ? -3% |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.9 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.9 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.4 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (119.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 87% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 3% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 96% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Motorola Moto G8 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 62.9% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 62.9% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 62.9% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (120.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 88% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 2% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 96% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Av/Standby | 0.1 / 0.3 Watt |
Låg belastning | 1.5 / 2.1 / 2.5 Watt |
Hög belastning |
5.2 / 7.5 Watt |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S 5020 mAh | Motorola Moto G8 4000 mAh | Huawei P40 Lite 4200 mAh | Gigaset GS290 4700 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro 4500 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 7% | 24% | 19% | 10% | 20% | 10% | |
Idle Minimum * | 1.5 | 1.3 13% | 0.79 47% | 0.88 41% | 0.79 47% | 0.982 ? 35% | 0.894 ? 40% |
Idle Average * | 2.1 | 2 5% | 2.14 -2% | 2.05 2% | 2.32 -10% | 1.94 ? 8% | 1.456 ? 31% |
Idle Maximum * | 2.5 | 2.8 -12% | 2.23 11% | 2.1 16% | 2.38 5% | 2.06 ? 18% | 1.616 ? 35% |
Load Average * | 5.2 | 3.9 25% | 3.6 31% | 4.73 9% | 4.72 9% | 4.02 ? 23% | 6.45 ? -24% |
Load Maximum * | 7.5 | 7.2 4% | 5.17 31% | 5.61 25% | 7.68 -2% | 6.16 ? 18% | 9.8 ? -31% |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S 5020 mAh | Motorola Moto G8 4000 mAh | Huawei P40 Lite 4200 mAh | Gigaset GS290 4700 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro 4500 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -12% | -11% | -21% | -22% | |
Reader / Idle | 2263 | 1953 -14% | 2154 -5% | 1893 -16% | |
H.264 | 1269 | 1048 -17% | 1176 -7% | 984 -22% | |
WiFi v1.3 | 1187 | 988 -17% | 1007 -15% | 934 -21% | 864 -27% |
Load | 279 | 276 -1% | 228 -18% | 212 -24% |
För
Emot
Omdöme – Mycket att erbjuda
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Xiaomis Redmi Note 9S är ett levande bevis på att du under 2020 kan få en utmärkt smartphone för 2.000 kronor, både i fråga om storlek och när det kommer till utrustning och anslutbarhet. Du kan däremot inte vänta dig samma LTE-prestanda som på andra toppskiktstelefoner och den saknar WiFi 6 och NFC.
Det som Redmi Note 9S däremot har att erbjuda är en flexibel och mångsidig kamerauppsättning med ett flertal användbara linser. Återigen, förvänta dig inte samma fotokvalitet som på betydligt dyrare toppskikts-telefoner, men sänker du dina förväntningar en aning kommer du kunna acceptera kamerasystemet för vad det är.
Du får dessutom ett enormt batteri, som åtminstone till viss del är ansvarigt för telefonens höga vikt men som gav nästan 20 timmar batteritid i vårt WiFi-test.
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S har en skaplig kamera och lång batteritid till ett lågt pris.
Skärmen är ljusstark med kunde behövt ett högre kontrastförhållande. Positioneringstjänsterna var tillräckligt exakta för vardagsbruk. Med tanke på prisklassen var Note 9S totalt sett ganska kraftfull. Den råkar inte ut för värmestrypning vid belastning och har vid skrivande stund ett uppdaterat Android-system.
För att sammanfatta så förtjänar Redmi Note 9S vår fulla rekommendation då den har utmärkt funktionalitet till ett lågt pris.
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
- 05/19/2020 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt